If only the plaintiff was made responsible for all legal costs associated with cases, we would no longer have class action lawsuits which only benefit lawyers.
The voice of Corporate America has spoken. As if it isn't already hard enough to sue, let's stack the deck even more and stamp the first amendment into the muck.
Are you serious? Any moron who can pay the filing fee can sue anyone for anything. It’s absurdly easy to file a lawsuit. Your supposition about the 1st Amendment is pathetically laughable. Plaintiffs bringing a merit less action or those recruited by a lawyer to be a plaintiff should absolutely be held financially responsible if their claim is found to be without merit. Who do you think pays for that garbage? We do every time we buy something. Do you think Apple, Google, Microsoft, Amazon or any of the rest are not passing that cost on to us? Make the lawyers responsible and you will quickly find meritless cases disappear and solid ones get settled quickly without years of delays.
The o.p. didn't say anything about "if their claim is found to be without merit"
Just remember that there is just one pathway to get an app installed on an iPhone and that’s through Apple. Apple has complete and total control over the App Store marketplace. Certainly there are security benefits to this level of control. But one could easily argue that if an app passes security standards and doesn’t violate some severe level of indecency why shouldn’t all apps be allowed in the App Store and let the competition of the market pick winners and losers? I for one don’t need some Apple curation process to “protect” me from undesirable apps. I’m an adult. I can handle that. I’m not a lawyer but there is certainly some level of “monopolistic” behavior happening on the part of Apple when they have absolute control over which apps are allowed in the App Store.
Incorrect - The overwhelming majority of "free"/ advertised sponsored apps could offer the same functionally as web apps. They don't get the same discovery that way but it is technically viable and has only improved with every version of the OS and many Safari minor updates. These apps can be as adult as they like.
The store is not the only way - just the way the market wants.
Edit: to add All these people who want an alternative store should just make one on the web.
If only the plaintiff was made responsible for all legal costs associated with cases, we would no longer have class action lawsuits which only benefit lawyers.
That would CODIFY that only rich entities would be able to sue. Have you never met an artist who was trying to stop some scammer from selling their art on “stolen images printed on products” websites?
Uh, developers of “free apps”? Free as in loaded with ads or in-app purchases? Or were they *actually* free?
I do think Apple have changed from one company to another, and not for the better, but this specific argument of monopoly still doesn’t work. There’s something in there that’s anticompetitive practices, but monopoly isn’t really it.
Yup, “something in there”, but as usual, you don’t know what it is.
I do and it’s irrelevant to this conversation. Get over yourself. I’m on Apple’s side here and it’s still not enough for you. Apple doesn’t need you defending them all day.
Just remember that there is just one pathway to get an app installed on an iPhone and that’s through Apple. Apple has complete and total control over the App Store marketplace. Certainly there are security benefits to this level of control. But one could easily argue that if an app passes security standards and doesn’t violate some severe level of indecency why shouldn’t all apps be allowed in the App Store and let the competition of the market pick winners and losers? I for one don’t need some Apple curation process to “protect” me from undesirable apps. I’m an adult. I can handle that. I’m not a lawyer but there is certainly some level of “monopolistic” behavior happening on the part of Apple when they have absolute control over which apps are allowed in the App Store.
The problem is you maybe an adult, but there are millions of users who are not. Many children have access to iPhones and iPads of their own without perhaps needed parental restrictions.
I prefer a curated approach, and while it's not perfect. Sometimes devs have tried to pull fast one's to get things by Apple and they have, only to be busted later. Then Whine about it when they do.
There are way too many politicians who are extremely technologically ignorant and don't want to learn either, they just want everything to be 'fair" or "equal". which really isn't possible in the real world.
This is right in line with the right to repair stuff, lets overlook the potential damage they may cause, because they just want to fix Apple Stuff...
Comments
They don't get the same discovery that way but it is technically viable and has only improved with every version of the OS and many Safari minor updates.
These apps can be as adult as they like.
The store is not the only way - just the way the market wants.
Edit: to add
All these people who want an alternative store should just make one on the web.
I do and it’s irrelevant to this conversation. Get over yourself. I’m on Apple’s side here and it’s still not enough for you. Apple doesn’t need you defending them all day.
"So actual apps downloaded = 200. Two hundred times $0 times one billion = $200,000,000,000." Yep, the math works out.
I prefer a curated approach, and while it's not perfect. Sometimes devs have tried to pull fast one's to get things by Apple and they have, only to be busted later. Then Whine about it when they do.
There are way too many politicians who are extremely technologically ignorant and don't want to learn either, they just want everything to be 'fair" or "equal". which really isn't possible in the real world.
This is right in line with the right to repair stuff, lets overlook the potential damage they may cause, because they just want to fix Apple Stuff...